Military Review

NATO is getting closer to the borders of Russia

69
NATO is getting closer to the borders of Russia

The North Atlantic Alliance is getting closer to the borders of Russia. The deployment of an anti-missile system, which will become part of the European missile defense system being created by the United States and NATO, started on Monday in Deveselu, in southern Romania. It is estimated that the missile defense system in Romania will be fully operational in 2015. The official launch ceremony of the deployment of the anti-missile defense system was attended by the US Deputy Secretary of Defense for Political Affairs James Miller, the Romanian leadership, as well as a number of high-ranking representatives of the Alliance member countries.


According to the Deputy Foreign Minister of Romania Bogdan Aurescu, the missile defense system in Deveselu is “an integral part of the strategic Romanian-American partnership in the field of security.” The anti-missile complex in Deveselu will be not only a Romanian contribution to the US European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPA) program, but also an element of the NATO missile defense system. On the base in Deveselu they plan to deploy the American multi-purpose anti-aircraft missile system Aegis (Aegis), which is equipped with Standard missile 3 (SM-3) interceptor missiles to intercept ballistic missiles. The facility will be equipped with radar stations, its personnel will be about 200 people. According to the American Embassy in Bucharest, the cost of the complex is estimated at 134 million. US dollars. In the near future, Romanian experts will carry out work on the refurbishment of the former base of the Air Force, and then the Americans will begin to install an anti-aircraft missile system and radar.

It is clear that the deployment of missile defense elements in Eastern Europe is a stumbling block in relations with Moscow. Thus, the Romanian Defense Minister Mircea Soul said that the construction of the base begins despite the lack of mutual understanding on this issue with Russia. Moscow is not the first year trying to get a clear answer about the need to build missile defense systems. However, to date, everything has been limited to unconvincing excuses about the missile threat from the Middle East. And the United States moved from talk to business. Moreover, Washington and Brussels continue to convince Moscow of the non-direction of the European missile defense system against the Russian Federation.

The other day, this problem was touched by the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Sergey Lavrov. According to the minister, Moscow is ready for a constructive dialogue with both the United States and the Alliance, is open to finding a compromise solution, but “we will not pretend that there will be no constant talk about all this not against Russia”. October 23 The 2013 of the year at the Alliance headquarters hosted the Russia-NATO Council (NRC) meeting. As during other meetings and conferences, Moscow actively opposed the construction of anti-missile defense elements in Poland and Romania and the promotion of NATO infrastructure to the borders of Russia. But to achieve some progress on this issue failed. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that the Alliance and Russia did not agree on any parameters of possible cooperation in the field of missile defense. However, both sides agreed that “further consultations are the way forward.” Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu started an old disc about the need for "firm legal guarantees" that the US missile defense system will not be directed against the Russian nuclear forces. Although it is obvious to all that Washington and Brussels can give a carriage and a small truck of various promises and assurances about their “peaceful” aspirations, this will not change the situation. The missile defense system in Europe is directed against the only possible threat - the nuclear deterrent forces of Russia. All the rest is idle chatter.

The United States is gradually but surely continuing the policy of putting Russia on its bases. The construction of a base in Romania began in December 2011, when Washington and Bucharest concluded an agreement on defense against ballistic missiles. Thanks to this treaty, a base is being created in Romania with the American multi-purpose Aegis SAM. The anti-aircraft missile system is equipped with SM-3 interceptor missiles, which are capable of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles and medium-range missiles. The establishment of a missile defense base in Romania is part of the United States European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA). As part of the EPAA, it was planned to create a European missile defense system in four phases: at the first stage, deploy four US missile defense destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea and radar stations in Turkey; on the second, to deploy the American multi-purpose Aegis anti-aircraft missile system in Romania; in the third year, by the year of 2018, deploy a missile defense facility in Poland; in the fourth, by 2020, to re-equip all the complexes with more sophisticated SM-3 Block II interceptor missiles with increased combat capabilities, the anti-missile must have a longer range and higher speed.

In 2012, at the summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Chicago, a statement was made about the launch of the first stage of the European missile defense system. Almost simultaneously, Washington announced the cancellation of the fourth stage of the deployment of the missile defense system in Europe and the preservation of plans to deploy missile defense elements in Poland and Romania. Moscow regarded this statement as a threat to its nuclear forces and spoke out against deploying a missile defense system even with Washington’s refusal of the fourth stage.

According to NATO, the US National Missile Defense System is a system of high-frequency early warning radars, tracking satellites and air defense missile systems with sea-based and land-based interceptor missiles. Anti-missiles are designed to destroy warheads of small, medium and intercontinental ballistic missiles. In the United States themselves, anti-missile sites were created in Alaska, California, and it was decided to create a third region on the Atlantic coast. The maritime component of the missile defense system is represented by cruisers and destroyers of missile defense, they are deployed mainly in the Pacific Ocean zone. In the coming years, it is planned to strengthen the ship grouping in the Atlantic Ocean. In addition, Washington is creating a regional missile defense system in Asia, along with Japan and South Korea. Missile defense should protect the United States, as well as NATO allies and forward bases from a limited-capacity missile strike. Syria, Iran and the DPRK are among the countries of threat.

However, the fact of the deployment of elements of the American missile defense system in Eastern Europe clearly indicates the anti-Russian orientation of these bases. Syria, Iran and the DPRK do not threaten Europe. The creation of a regional missile defense system in Asia, together with Japan and South Korea, is clearly directed not only against the DPRK, but also China and Russia. Washington has already frankly knocks together a block from Tokyo and Seoul. So, October 28 received a message that Seoul yielded to the pressure of Washington and actually agreed with the possibility of the Japanese Self-Defense Force exercising the right to collective defense outside of Japan’s territory. In addition, Korean media have argued that Seoul is susceptible to Washington's persuasion of a global missile defense system. So, there is a high probability that South Korea will buy Lockheed Martin’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missiles. This will allow Seoul to create two echelons of missile defense: long-range, with THAAD missiles, which have an intercept height of up to 150 kilometers, a range of up to 200 km, and a short range with Patriot PAC-3. At the same time, Seoul can arm its warships with SM-3 antimissiles. As a result, South Korea will create a system on land and at sea that fully coincides with the US missile defense system. Washington has repeatedly made it clear to Seoul that he would like South Korea to follow the example of Japan and join the global American missile defense system. Experts say that although Seoul officially denies participation in the creation of the South Korean missile defense system of the United States, they are doing so in order not to annoy China, which, if desired, can cause South Korea a lot of trouble. In reality, South Korea, creating a national missile defense system, in fact, forms its missile defense system that can be easily integrated into the American global missile defense system.

Russia, it's time to answer

To begin with, it is necessary to bring order to consciousness, to stop chatter about “cooperation on European missile defense”, the creation of a single missile defense with the EU; the possibility of joint operation of missile defense facilities (at one time there was a discussion about the possibility of joint operation of the Gabala radar station); Nondirectionality; “Legal guarantees”, etc. Obviously, no general missile defense system with a potential enemy can be created in principle. The US will not give any guarantees, and if they promise something, they will immediately “throw” it with a light heart (when political circumstances change).

All such conversations and negotiations only disgrace Russia, speak of its weakness and the worthlessness of its leaders. No positive result in negotiations with the enemy is impossible to achieve! We can recall the main milestones of the negotiation process, which was started back in the USSR and led to the almost complete surrender of the national interests of Russia. The Treaty on the Limitation of Missile Defense Systems (PRO) 26 in May 1972 was a strategic mistake. It became clear when the United States began work on the creation of a national missile defense system, emphasizing its commitment to the ABM Treaty in words. When the United States had already done a significant part of the work on creating missile defense, they unilaterally withdrew from the Treaty in 2001.

In the year 1985 of the USSR, in which the “perestroika” orgy began, it declared a unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing. What for? The result is long-term harm. The Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF) from December 8 1987 was in fact a betrayal of the national interests of the USSR - Russia. The main culprit - M. Gorbachev. Missiles of medium and short range are in service with almost all regional powers. In addition, such missiles could be a response to the deployment of American bases near our borders. The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) of 19 in November 1990 of the year is another act of betrayal of national interests by Gorbachev and his team of "rebuilders-destroyers". It would be difficult to come up with a more stupid and treacherous agreement limiting the defensive potential of Russia on its own territory.

Strategic Offensive Arms Agreements: START-1 of 30 — 31 of July 1991 of the Year; START-II — January of 1993 of the Year; START-III — of 8 of April of 2010. All agreements were more beneficial to the United States than to Russia, since they ignored the superiority of the United States in conventional, including high-precision weapons, kept the Americans with the so-called. “Return potential”, did not limit the nuclear potential of other powers, etc.

What to do? Return to the national sovereignty in the field of defense of Russia! This means a complete rejection of the talk on missile defense. It is necessary to develop national missile defense and EKO, as well as missile defense systems for potential opponents. Break all unfavorable, unequal agreements on strategic offensive arms, stop any negotiations on them. It is necessary to develop full-fledged nuclear deterrent forces. Unilaterally withdraw from the treacherous Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles. In the shortest possible time to restore the production of these systems. This is a very important decision. On the threshold - a world war. Medium and short range missiles are necessary to ensure Russia's national security.

In the future, it is necessary to stop consultations and negotiations with our potential enemies on any disarmament issues, this is a deception. To believe in the “peaceful intentions” of the owners of the West, who over the past centuries have washed the planet with the blood of tens of millions of people, is either upward idiocy or outright betrayal. Moscow should only do what provides the deepest interests of the Russian civilization and its peoples. If you want peace, prepare for war, everything else is from the evil one!
Author:
69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Akim
    Akim 30 October 2013 08: 48
    42
    I neighing yesterday, I can't. Due to the density of the system and the wrong angle of the photographer, they turned out like sticky dumplings.
    1. INVESTOR
      INVESTOR 30 October 2013 10: 11
      +7
      Circled around from all sides su..k .. They are afraid of what will happen when Russia rises from its knees. Therefore, they piss .. And their lives will not help them ...
      1. JonnyT
        JonnyT 30 October 2013 11: 33
        +3
        They are picked up slowly, and will be dumped very quickly! Faster than Georgians
        1. Versed
          Versed 5 November 2013 04: 17
          -2
          Maybe like the Red Army in 1941 to Moscow itself? lol
      2. INVESTOR
        INVESTOR 30 October 2013 11: 34
        15
        I think so England and America are preparing to go to war with us. Any "" firm legal guarantees "will no longer be needed when the temperature of our" bodies "of our wives, children, mothers reaches the temperature of the sun, where, as you know, nothing living lives !!! Well, what the hell is their contracts? We climb with him ... My subjective opinion: a strong army on the m navy is a matter of life and death for us. And what about these they will always come to climb, so I think it is necessary to destroy them preemptively. To kill ourselves or economically. The second option is more viable.
        1. VARCHUN
          VARCHUN 7 November 2013 14: 46
          0
          He answered his own question that a strong army and a strong fleet are needed, and now tell me what your generals of the highest ranks do in the flesh to the minister, eh? Something is not visible in Russia.
    2. 10kAzAk01
      10kAzAk01 30 October 2013 10: 13
      +9
      I do not watch the rainbow flag !!!!!!!!
      1. Michael_59
        Michael_59 30 October 2013 17: 07
        +4
        Quote: 10kAzAk01
        I do not watch the rainbow flag!


        And why do you agree with the assignment of the symbol of the rainbow by these bastards?
    3. Akhtuba73
      Akhtuba73 30 October 2013 10: 42
      11
      Quote: Akim
      like sticky dumplings.

      Gay, choli, parade? Each with its own flag!
    4. Starfish
      Starfish 30 October 2013 11: 23
      +8
      "it turned out like dumplings stuck together."

      this is a "combat" grinding laughing . all parts of the body are ground
    5. misterwulf
      misterwulf 30 October 2013 11: 50
      +3
      Rather, homosexuals.
    6. mirag2
      mirag2 30 October 2013 12: 08
      +7
      I can’t read such things — my heart bleeds.
      Yeah ...
      Well, don’t need to regret, you need to forget, worry (if such a topic - and the Gorbachev-goat-can not be punished (and there is a lot for that) - Yeltsin-bast died by his death, and at that time I knew very rich people who owned it enrichment plant — his son lived a greedy reptile in America — gold I was transporting them to the states by a cubic meter — I myself heard how they talked about it — like how much it costs to take to America — like, the weight is big, but the volume is small-1m3! Imagine how much a clique Yeltsin pulled out of the country, while others didn’t have anything to eat!)
      I then received $ 350 a week, regardless of how many days I was at work — and I remember how crazy grandmas were and how few people who worked at state enterprises (except for raw materials — timber, oil, gas).
      And it hurts me to read about it.
      And to answer NATO is not what it is necessary, but put in its place.
      And so it wasn’t sour with us — I saw a speech by a German expert here — he talked about why they do not like Putin in the West.
      Now I’ll find a link to the video:
      Now, about 3 minutes, pliz, I’ll enter, how to insert a YouTube video ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. mirag2
        mirag2 30 October 2013 12: 35
        +6
        All dear gentlemen, comrades, here is a reference for you, as promised:
        www.youtube.com/embed/147tGc6IRo4?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
        He says that the West is angry with Putin because he stopped selling Russia when the Khodorkovsky floor of Siberia wanted to sell BP. And his son, Pavel, by the way runs a fund to promote democracy in Russia in the USA ...
    7. Far East
      Far East 30 October 2013 12: 29
      +2
      Quote: Akim
      I neighing yesterday, I can't. Due to the density of the system and the wrong angle of the photographer, they turned out like sticky dumplings.

      it's just a HAMMESS! lol hi
    8. Maks111
      Maks111 30 October 2013 13: 06
      +1
      These words would be yes to Putin’s ears. But the Romanians in vain were freed from the Turks under the Tsar, in vain ...
    9. VOLCHOXURAL
      VOLCHOXURAL 30 October 2013 13: 37
      11
      I do not watch the rainbow flag !!!!!!!!
      I already laid out this picture like that, but I'm sorry, I can not restrain myself - I will post it again laughing
      1. Michael_59
        Michael_59 30 October 2013 17: 09
        +1
        Tin ... I almost felt sick, yes ... + you, definitely, for political information)))
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. The comment was deleted.
    10. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 30 October 2013 15: 38
      +2
      +++++++++++++++ I padstole .... laughing laughing laughing
    11. vjhbc
      vjhbc 30 October 2013 19: 55
      +7
      romanian female dogs forgot this
    12. MIKHAN
      MIKHAN 30 October 2013 20: 06
      0
      At the end of the column, the place (pictured) was not left for Ukraine ..?
      http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/267/zywr97.jpg
      1. alone
        alone 30 October 2013 21: 35
        0
        Mr. Samsonov incorrectly named the article. But already on the border with Russia. 400 km from St. Petersburg. and it turns out as if they had just reached Romania
    13. Vasyan1971
      Vasyan1971 31 October 2013 22: 18
      0
      The heap is not so scary ...
  2. Igor39
    Igor39 30 October 2013 08: 52
    +6
    NATO is approaching the borders of Russia. I’ll clarify, NATO has already reached the borders. It is necessary to adequately answer them or ....
    1. strannik595
      strannik595 30 October 2013 09: 40
      17
      let them get closer, you won’t have to look far wassat .... in fact, the only thing that can scare NATO is Russia's withdrawal from the treaty banning short- and medium-range missiles, place these missiles at a distance of 5-10 minutes from Romania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and then there will be solid and very legal guarantees ... otherwise they do not understand, no one negotiates with the weak, they are simply devoured, crunching and shouting "WOW"
      1. Aryan
        Aryan 30 October 2013 10: 58
        +2
        something is not believed that they will wait for the enemy object to fly to its territory for subsequent defeat
        sorry for ordinary Ukrainians and Moldova
        on the fields of which "feathers of lined angels" will fall
        and fragments of anti-aircraft missiles sad
      2. Dmitry 2246
        Dmitry 2246 30 October 2013 11: 03
        +8
        The Romanians, Hungarians, Italians have a good experience of war with us on occasion recall.
        Quote: strannik595
        the only thing that can scare NATO members is Russia's withdrawal from the treaty banning short- and medium-range missiles,

        Work is underway, we will exit the contract already having rockets.
  3. koksalek
    koksalek 30 October 2013 08: 56
    13
    NATO crept to the Kremlin .... the government woke up and opened one eye
    1. Michael_59
      Michael_59 30 October 2013 09: 12
      +5
      Quote: koksalek
      the government woke up and opened one eye

      Yeah ... Chocolate ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. strannik595
        strannik595 30 October 2013 10: 30
        -2
        say it to Putin, Trutnev or Shoigu in the face ........ I hope you have a run on obstacles
    2. donchepano
      donchepano 31 October 2013 07: 10
      +1
      Quote: koksalek
      NATO crept to the Kremlin .... the government woke up and opened one eye

      Probably some of NATO, in any case, supporters have already been in the Kremlin for more than 20 years
  4. svp67
    svp67 30 October 2013 09: 00
    11
    The missile defense system, which will become part of the European missile defense system being created by the United States and NATO, started on Monday at a base in Devesela in southern Romania.

    Maybe it's time for Iskander to appear in Transnistria ... by accident ....
    1. INTER
      INTER 30 October 2013 09: 05
      +7
      Quote: svp67
      Maybe it's time for Iskander to appear in Transnistria ... by accident ....

      An interesting idea, but for starters you can also S-300.
      1. Akim
        Akim 30 October 2013 09: 25
        +9
        Quote: INTER
        An interesting idea, but for starters you can also S-300.

        First you need to recognize the state itself and ask if they want this placement.
        1. svp67
          svp67 30 October 2013 09: 47
          +9
          Quote: Akim
          First you need to recognize the state itself and ask if they want this placement.

          I said - BY CHANCE, at one of the weapons depots on the territory of the base, "find" the Iskander division - and you don't need to ask ... Well, not Iskander, Tochk-U, a couple of divisions and there will be enough to "deprive the West" of sleep ...
          1. Akim
            Akim 30 October 2013 10: 03
            +1
            Quote: svp67
            Well, not "Iskander", "Tochk-U", a couple of divisions and there will be enough of them to "deprive the West" of sleep ...

            You can dream up. But 500 Russian peacekeepers there are a terrible force.
            1. svp67
              svp67 30 October 2013 10: 08
              +4
              Quote: Akim
              You can dream up. But 500 Russian peacekeepers there are a terrible force.

              Well, if you fantasize, then in full:
              - neatly "paint" "0" and 5000 "peacekeepers" THERE will indeed be able to "CREATE WORLD" by order of the Supreme Commander in that region, before the main forces approach ...
              1. Akim
                Akim 30 October 2013 10: 18
                0
                Quote: svp67
                5000 "peacekeepers" THERE will indeed be able to "CREATE WORLD" by order of the Supreme Commander in that region, before the main forces approach ...

                Let's talk realistically. The Kremlin recognizes the PMR - the flag in his hands can be placed fully and base with their consent. That's just the transfer of troops to her problem. Through neutral Moldova or non-aligned Ukraine. Even through the air without coordination does not work.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 30 October 2013 10: 52
                  +2
                  Quote: Akim
                  That's just the transfer of troops to her problem.

                  Now - YES, but this does not mean that it will be so all the time ...
                  1. Akim
                    Akim 30 October 2013 11: 26
                    0
                    Quote: svp67
                    but this does not mean that it will be so all the time ...

                    You oppose your actions to NATO countries and it is not legal to draw in neutral countries.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 30 October 2013 11: 30
                      +4
                      Quote: Akim
                      You oppose your actions to NATO countries and it is not legal to draw in neutral countries.

                      There are no "neutral" countries, all this is a PROFANATION, and it was not my country that started the confrontation first, we are FORCED to respond somehow. And of course it's not a fact how I "fantasized" it, but "THE ANSWER WILL BE"
                      1. Akim
                        Akim 30 October 2013 12: 01
                        -1
                        Quote: svp67
                        and not my country was the first to start a confrontation, we are FORCED to respond somehow.

                        And not mine, and especially not Moldova, but you think that you can spit on their position. By what right? The right of the fittest?
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 30 October 2013 13: 03
                        +1
                        Quote: Akim
                        And not mine, and especially not Moldova, but you think that you can spit on their position.

                        Calm down, we do not spit, we - answer. And it is not worth MY FANTASY to perceive it as a STATE action, but I don’t doubt that the answer WILL FOLLOW, so that there are fewer emotions in the EU and NATO that will not be counted ...
                      3. Akim
                        Akim 30 October 2013 13: 07
                        -1
                        Quote: svp67
                        And it’s not worth MY FANTASY to perceive it as a STATE action

                        I am writing you with a capital letter, i.e. I appeal to you personally, and not to your authority.
                      4. svp67
                        svp67 30 October 2013 13: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Akim
                        I am writing you with a capital letter, i.e. I appeal to you personally, and not to your authority.
                        Have I personally offended you?
                      5. Akim
                        Akim 30 October 2013 13: 18
                        0
                        Quote: svp67
                        Have I personally offended you?

                        In no case. We discussed your hypothetical scenario, and not the plans of the Russian General Staff. He simply pointed out the flaws so that the bravo would not wave a saber.
                      6. svp67
                        svp67 30 October 2013 13: 22
                        0
                        Quote: Akim
                        He simply pointed out the flaws so that the bravo would not wave a saber.

                        Well, we are preparing for this "Bulava" ...
      2. Flooding
        Flooding 30 October 2013 12: 33
        +3
        Quote: Akim
        Through neutral Moldova or non-aligned Ukraine.

        What are the servicemen of "neutral" Moldova and "non-aligned" Ukraine doing in Iraq?
        1. Akim
          Akim 30 October 2013 12: 55
          -4
          Quote: Flood

          What are the servicemen of "neutral" Moldova and "non-aligned" Ukraine doing in Iraq?

          What fought? No. They carried patrol missions and ensured order in the regions, because the Americans had shifted their legal power, but had not appointed a new one. Ukrainians fought only once to repel an attack on their base.
          1. Flooding
            Flooding 30 October 2013 13: 23
            +1
            Quote: Akim
            What fought? No. They carried patrol missions and ensured order in the regions, because the Americans had shifted their legal power, but had not appointed a new one. Ukrainians fought only once to repel an attack on their base.

            Sorry. Probably, I do not understand the meaning of the words "neutral" and "non-aligned". The authorities of independent Iraq have invited the military contingent of Ukraine to carry out a mission?
            1. Akim
              Akim 30 October 2013 13: 26
              -1
              Quote: Flood
              Independent Iraqi authorities invited the Ukrainian military contingent to carry out some mission?

              Yes. In May 2003.
            2. Flooding
              Flooding 30 October 2013 13: 42
              +2
              Quote: Akim
              Yes. In May 2003.

              Akim, pay closer attention to the question.
              In 2003 and until June 28, 2004 Iraq was ruled by an interim occupation administration led by American citizen Lewis Paul Bremer III.
              The question remains open.
            3. Akim
              Akim 30 October 2013 13: 55
              -1
              Quote: Flood
              In 2003 and until June 28, 2004 Iraq was ruled by an interim occupation administration led by American citizen Lewis Paul Bremer III.

              It was at that moment legal authority. The fact that it is occupational and not elected is another matter. She was recognized as temporary. And in the 2005th Gazi Mashal (you break the language further) expressed gratitude to the 6th brigade. I will say it again. The overthrow of Hussein’s power was not legal! But the Ukrainian military did not take part in this.
            4. Flooding
              Flooding 30 October 2013 14: 04
              +2
              Quote: Akim
              The overthrow of Hussein’s power was not legal!

              But at the same time, in your opinion, the control of Iraq that passed into the hands of the Americans was legal. Joke right. Are you a formalist? Does a corrupt UN resolution cross out all human laws?
              Quote: Akim
              And in the 2005th Gazi Mashal (you break the language further) expressed gratitude to the 6th brigade.

              And I didn’t say that Ukrainians in Iraq beat the bucks or engaged in robbery. Surely more than one hundred mines were neutralized and more than a dozen lives were saved by their presence.
              But does the military presence of Ukraine in Iraq fit into its non-aligned status? That's what it was all about.
            5. Akim
              Akim 30 October 2013 14: 15
              -1
              Quote: Flood
              But does the military presence of Ukraine in Iraq fit into its non-aligned status?

              To begin with, non-aligned status appeared in Ukraine in the 2010th year, and before that we were actively pulled into NATO.
            6. Flooding
              Flooding 30 October 2013 14: 29
              +1
              Quote: Akim
              To begin with, non-aligned status appeared in Ukraine in the 2010th year, and before that we were actively pulled into NATO.

              Then mille pardon. It remains only to bring the military into line with paper cases.
              We will not rinse "neutral" Moldova.
  • alone
    alone 30 October 2013 21: 38
    -2
    how will Moldova give permission to transfer troops there? After all, Transnistria is still legally the territory of Moldova.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 31 October 2013 11: 13
    0
    If absolutely necessary, no one will ask anyone ... Just do not say that they will bring down our transporters - they will fly undercover ...
    1. Akim
      Akim 31 October 2013 12: 50
      0
      Quote: pahom54
      If absolutely necessary, no one will ask anyone ...

      Right now.
  • Flooding
    Flooding 30 October 2013 12: 31
    +1
    Quote: Akim
    First you need to recognize the state itself and ask if they want this placement.

    I am sure that they will not refuse in any case.
    1. Akim
      Akim 30 October 2013 12: 45
      0
      Quote: Flood
      I am sure that they will not refuse in any case.

      And I would not be so sure. And the recognition of the Kremlin will not add political dividends to them. Rather, the opposite. So far they are collaborating with other countries within the framework of unrecognized territory. If recognized as a separate state, they will be forced to create their own diplomatic staff and work at least through the Russian consulates. But the subject will not be recognized by other states, at least Ukraine, therefore its economic agreements within the framework of an unrecognized state will be canceled. If Russia had a common border with the PMR, a mute bazaar would be pulled by economic ties, but in this case it is not an easy question
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 30 October 2013 13: 20
        +1
        Quote: Akim
        And I would not be so sure.

        That's why she and my point of view, to be different from others.
        Quote: Akim
        And the recognition of the Kremlin will not add political dividends to them. Rather, the opposite. If recognized as a separate state, they will be forced to create their own diplomatic staff and work at least through the Russian consulates. But the subject will not be recognized by other states, at least Ukraine, therefore its economic agreements within the framework of an unrecognized state will be canceled.

        What do we have today? The negotiation process is practically at the same positions as ten years ago. This time. The impossibility of Moldova entering is not even in the EU (it would be ridiculous to talk about it), but in Mother Romania with the available ballast. But this is the cherished dream of the Romanian revanchists and the national liberal authorities of Moldova. These are two. Huge gas debt PMR. These are three. Pro-Russian population of Transnistria. These are four. One could continue, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
        How do you imagine the development of events? Ukraine would be extremely interested in the light of the course towards rapprochement with the EU to play a solo part in the negotiation process. But what can she offer? The EU would be very tempting to resolve this issue in its interests, but it cannot afford to step on the corns of the Russian Federation indiscriminately. The United States at the moment it is important to maintain a hotbed of tension in the region of Russia's geopolitical interests.
        So, it all depends on the actions of Russian politicians. Here and now only they can say the final word. What this will lead to is the next question.
        1. Akim
          Akim 30 October 2013 13: 37
          -1
          Quote: Flood
          Here and now only they can say the final word

          They can’t say anything. As for Ukraine, it will not pull the negotiation process itself. The most interesting thing is that everyone is happy with the current situation. Russia sometimes does not even send representatives. Almost every quarter in Odessa there are tripartite meetings. Nobody from the Russian Foreign Ministry. And about the pro-Russian majority of the population there is also a controversial issue. It is pro-Russian, while pensions and subsidies are paid there.
          1. Flooding
            Flooding 30 October 2013 13: 54
            0
            Quote: Akim
            They can’t say anything.

            Do not be fooled by the prolonged silence.
            The status quo will last as long as Russia can afford.
            Quote: Akim
            The most interesting thing is that everyone is happy with the current situation.

            Again, exactly until the moment when the neighboring territories rushed into the open arms (open mouth?) Of the EU. In any case, this is what Yevgeny Shevchuk thinks.
            Read more at http://inst.eurasec.com/novosti/3782/
            Quote: Akim
            And about the pro-Russian majority of the population there is also a controversial issue. It is pro-Russian, while pensions and subsidies are paid there.

            Perhaps from Ukraine it is more visible than from Moldova. I will not argue.
            But if you are right, then only to the extent that the statement about the attractiveness of Europe in view of its economic viability is true.
            1. Akim
              Akim 30 October 2013 14: 10
              -1
              Quote: Flood
              Again, exactly until the moment when the neighboring territories rushed into the open arms (open mouth?) Of the EU. In any case, this is what Yevgeny Shevchuk thinks.

              I'm not entirely from Ukraine, I'm from Odessa. Gaster from Tiraspol often happens here. Never believe "Vesy". What about what Russia can do? Never mind. The train left. I already wrote about this. It is impossible to convince Ukraine to recognize the PMR. She doesn't even recognize Taiwan. Therefore, Russia is satisfied with the current situation.
              1. Flooding
                Flooding 30 October 2013 14: 17
                +1
                Quote: Akim
                It is impossible to convince Ukraine to recognize the PMR. She does not even recognize Taiwan. Therefore, Russia is satisfied with the current situation.

                Did I correctly cut the quote? A joke of course.
                Yes, our views are opposite. Let's get back to our argument in a year or two.
                Something tells me that the wait is not long.

                PS
                Apparently you are not only from Odessa, but also from Odessa.
                1. Akim
                  Akim 30 October 2013 14: 32
                  -1
                  Quote: Flood
                  Yes, our views are opposite. Let's get back to our argument in a year or two.

                  For 20 years nothing has changed. Do you think it will be different? If it were not for Russia, the PMR would have long been the autonomy of Moldova with the broadest rights (keeping its armed forces) up to the official secession from the state, if Moldova, God forbid, ceases to exist as a legal entity. And so, this is a semi-bandit principality with the Sheriff company at its head. And this fact does not allow industrial Transnistria to develop.
                2. Flooding
                  Flooding 30 October 2013 14: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: Akim
                  For 20 years, nothing has changed. Do you think it will be different?

                  Yes, sooner or later everything will end. Or do you think that
                  semi-bandit principality led by the Sheriff company
                  forever?
                  Quote: Akim
                  If not for Russia, Transdniestria would have long been the autonomy of Moldova with the broadest rights

                  Strange, Gagauzia, for example, backed by Turkey, is still not very happy with its "broadest" rights.
                  And, by the way, if it was already a question of cause-and-effect relations, if not for the USA, the USSR would not have collapsed, a corrupt clique would not have come to power in Russia, there would have been no topic for this conversation.
                  As for the preservation of their armed forces by autonomy - not even funny.
                3. Akim
                  Akim 30 October 2013 15: 01
                  -1
                  Quote: Flood
                  As for the preservation of their armed forces by autonomy - not even funny.

                  I will not say how much confused there. The armed forces themselves were to go under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Transnistria.
                  Older people gravitate towards Russia.
                  Young people just want to live a normal life.
                  As for the Russian benefits to the Transnistrians, students tell from there. In Russia, they made free higher education for them. Even scholarships are paid to excellent pupils and good students. If she is not there, starve for a thousand miles from the house. And you won’t send the gear. So they are going to study in Odessa, where exactly the same benefits and on a minibus every week you can go home.
                4. Flooding
                  Flooding 30 October 2013 16: 17
                  +1
                  Quote: Akim
                  As for the Russian benefits to the Transnistrians, students tell from there. In Russia, they made free higher education for them. Even scholarships are paid to excellent pupils and good students. If she is not there, starve for a thousand miles from the house. And you won’t send the gear.

                  Oh, how bad these Russians are.
                  Nothing that PMR still exists on the map thanks to Russia?
                  Nothing that the Transnistrian economy is alive thanks to 4 billion gas debt?
  • Same lech
    Same lech 30 October 2013 09: 01
    +4
    In the future, it is necessary to stop consultations and negotiations with our potential enemies on any disarmament issues, this is a hoax.
    Yes, I agree, but it is not necessary to stop them, if only in order to know what our enemies want, and to conduct their counter-consultations leads the competitors by the nose and use them for their own purposes - the usual world practice.
    As for our anti-aircraft defense and aerospace defense, no doubt we must invest in the development of these troops.
    Having superiority in this area over NATO and the USA, we can dictate to them our conditions.
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 30 October 2013 09: 05
    +5
    The US is gradually, but surely continuing to pursue a policy of encircling Russia with its bases. The construction of the base in Romania began in December 2011, when Washington and Bucharest entered into an agreement on defense against ballistic missiles.

    The mericatos will not leave their plans to increase the bases around us.
  • LaGlobal
    LaGlobal 30 October 2013 09: 15
    +2
    Day X, soon ??
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 30 October 2013 09: 54
      12
      Quote: LaGlobal
      Day X, soon ??


      In Romania, the software of the MBIUS Aegis version in version 5.0, the SPY-1 radar and 24 SM-3 Block IB interceptor missiles in 2015. In Poland, the ground-based version of the Aegis with software 5.1 and interceptor missiles SM-3 Block IB and Block IIA in 2018 It should be taken into account that the military doctrine of Russia says that Russia is ready to be the first to use nuclear weapons if necessary. if we are "very squeezed" in the European theater of operations, then there remains a real chance to use nuclear weapons ... But if there, by 2020, there is a full-fledged missile defense system, then this chance, according to their calculations, will be leveled. START 3, which we signed in no way does not take into account the missiles of Britain and France (NATO members). So what prevents "someone" from starting a war in Europe? And the mattress will again serve over the ocean. Today, such a scenario seems unlikely, but who knows what will happen tomorrow? That is, there is a threat in any way and it is necessary to react to it. It is no coincidence that the Americans raised a high about the tests of the new Rubezh missile, they sense that by its characteristics it is against the European missile defense system and intended.
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 30 October 2013 15: 55
        +2
        Quote: Ascetic
        It is no coincidence that the Americans raised a hi about the tests of the new Rubezh missile, they sense that by its characteristics it is designed against the European missile defense system.

        The American missile defense system for intercepting in the active sector (any, including space-based) at the present time and in the medium term is unlikely to be effective. It can be effective against a small country like North Korea, and then only against liquid-fueled ICBMs. The fact is that the OUT of rockets with solid fuel is 3 minutes or less, while for liquid-propellant rockets it is 4 minutes or more. The difference is critical to interception capability. For the possibility of intercepting missiles by anti-missiles located on space platforms, such platforms will need to be placed in a huge number, since the space platform in orbit moves at a tremendous speed and by the time the launch is detected, it will fly a long distance. And again, against solid-propellant ICBMs, even if the required number of intercept platforms are placed in orbit, the space missile defense is powerless. Therefore, the course taken to equip the strategic nuclear forces only with solid-propellant missiles of the Yarsa type and its further modifications is correct.
        1. Ascetic
          Ascetic 30 October 2013 20: 48
          +3
          Quote: Onyx
          on the active site


          On the active, even in range they will not be able to intercept even the nearest taxiway in Vypolzovo. In the meantime, SM-2 Block IV interceptor missiles are used to defeat BR in the atmosphere at the final stage of their flight and their warhead is equipped with a fragmentation warhead with conventional explosives, while the SM-3 interceptor missile destroys BR located in the middle of the trajectory and flying beyond the atmosphere, with the help of a kinetic warhead, that is, through shock-contact interaction. While we are not talking about OUT. Now the United States has the initial potential to intercept BR with a minimum level of intercontinental range, starting from a distance of up to 5500 km. The United States will have more opportunities to intercept ICBMs and SLBMs using Aegis MBIUS by 2018, at the third stage of the EPAP. And this must be prepared.
  • Rus86
    Rus86 30 October 2013 09: 19
    +4
    oh not in vain about RZD-rockets the topic was raised. (as correctly designated?)
    1. MAKCs
      MAKCs 30 October 2013 10: 05
      +4
      BZHRK (Combat Railway Missile Complex)
      1. Rus86
        Rus86 30 October 2013 12: 33
        0
        exactly thanks)
  • Blondin nikonov
    Blondin nikonov 30 October 2013 09: 22
    +1
    Not so long ago (officially) created the forces of special operations, it is time to use them fully .....
  • erased
    erased 30 October 2013 09: 31
    12
    NATO is playing hide and seek. And they just have to wait - Russia itself will collapse. We have here 5, 6, 7 ... 10 columns work so famously that external intervention is not necessary. Russians will be killed by the hands of migrants, immigrants from the south and their own traitors under the approval of bureaucrats, migrants will be quarreled among themselves and here you have free lands and bowels! If the Russian authorities are against the Russian people, then why do we need NATO? To fix the victory and formalize the rights of the winners.
    It’s shitty, but so far everything is going exactly that way.
  • Gennady1973
    Gennady1973 30 October 2013 09: 38
    +7
    I am not a strategist and not a commander-in-chief, but in response, I personally would have acted like this. He brought the country out of the treaty on short- and medium-range missiles so that the Romanians would understand they would be the first to die if anything, pulled Iskander to the border, in Cuba (thank God so far there is an opportunity for our base there) he placed a Voronezh-type radar and at least an air defense system "S-400". And Hitler also had a talking shop and fiery assurances ...
    1. Akim
      Akim 30 October 2013 09: 50
      +2
      Quote: Gennady1973
      so that the Romanians would understand they would be the first to die if anything, pulled Iskander to the border

      Iskanders are not included in the list of short-range missiles. They fall under the limitation of conventional weapons in Europe.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 30 October 2013 10: 56
        +6
        Quote: Akim
        They fall under the limitation of conventional weapons in Europe.


        The CFE quotas apply to tanks, armored vehicles, aircraft, helicopters, artillery systems
        but not on the OTRK. The fact that Oka was reduced under the INF Treaty is from the area of ​​the then treacherous policy, because in its parameters, it also did not fall under the INF Treaty like Iskander (up to 500 km). must exceed the range of 300 km. (that is, this is the minimum distance when the attacker can use nuclear weapons without the threat of suffering itself). Iskander-E has a range of 280 km. In Armenia, let's say there is a "native" one with a range of up to 500 km to neutralize the American missile defense system in Turkey.
        The quota of Russia under the CFE Treaty is now 6350 tanks, 11280 armored vehicles, 6315 artillery systems, 3416 aircraft and 855 helicopters. The flank quotas of the Russian Federation in the north-west of the European part of Russia and in the North Caucasus are 1300 tanks, 2140 armored vehicles and 1680 artillery systems. The total NATO quota at the time of signing the document was 19096 tanks, 31787 armored vehicles, 19529 artillery systems, 7273 aircraft and 2282 helicopters. But taking into account the expansion of the block, they currently comprise 22424 tanks, 36570 armored vehicles, 23137 artillery systems, 8038 aircraft and 2509 helicopters.
        В Pedevikii there are quotas current framework agreements
      2. stroporez
        stroporez 30 October 2013 12: 31
        0
        Quote: Akim
        Iskanders are not included in the list of short-range missiles
        - well so to restore the complexes "Oka" and "Selenga" ........ Schaub included ........
        1. Akim
          Akim 30 October 2013 12: 47
          -2
          Quote: stroporez
          stop the complexes "Oka" and "Selenga" .......

          and give everyone a laser baton. Where will you get the money?
          1. stroporez
            stroporez 30 October 2013 12: 59
            +2
            Well..... wassat ----- we will hang our bourgeois together with the "chosen ones" on Nevsky Prospect - from and money wassat
            1. Akim
              Akim 30 October 2013 13: 04
              +3
              Quote: stroporez
              we will hang our bourgeois together with the "chosen ones" on Nevsky Prospect - from and money

              If you have socialism, I will come to you. Although there are no pockets to be put on the wall.
              1. Corsair
                Corsair 30 October 2013 13: 32
                0
                Quote: Akim
                If you come to socialism, I will come to you.

                For free, freebie ?! And just to work for the good of the country, without mercantile interests ???
                1. Akim
                  Akim 30 October 2013 13: 41
                  0
                  Quote: Corsair
                  And just work for the good of the country,

                  You will remember the first five-year plans. As for the mercantile interests, they always are and will be. It's just much more pleasant to work for yourself and the state than for yourself and some "uncle".
              2. stroporez
                stroporez 30 October 2013 13: 32
                0
                Quote: Akim
                their pockets will need to be put against the wall.
                --- from, this is the right thing, for the right lad ........ wassat
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 30 October 2013 09: 43
    +5
    All such conversations and negotiations only dishonor Russia, speak of its weakness and the worthlessness of its leaders. It is impossible to achieve any positive result in negotiations with the enemy!
    I completely agree here! What year have we been conducting a "constructive dialogue with partners" ugh .. It's time to answer adequately already. Our TUs are flying to Venezuela on a friendly visit so far. It wouldn’t be time for them to stay there longer (for an indefinite period) Or to arrange a joint exercise to destroy the "MAIN TERRORIST OF THE PLANET" Time is running out, as if it were not too late ..
  • Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 30 October 2013 09: 44
    0
    Americans need to think about their problems, at least a huge public debt, and they are all according to the standards of the Cold War, if only to shove their rockets, do not care where to shove them. Well, they will also be well in Romania (if the gypsies don’t deceive), and then what? All this is very reminiscent of a very sick person who does not want to start treatment, but constantly deliberately distracts himself with certain problems, just to not notice the main problem, maybe it will resolve.
    1. V. Salama
      V. Salama 30 October 2013 11: 10
      +1
      Quote: Standard Oil
      Americans should have thought about their problems, at least a huge public debt, and they are all by the standards of the Cold War, if only to push their rockets ...
      They think. Their economy is 75% dependent on the military-industrial complex, while ours depends on the sale of oil and gas. To get out of the crisis, the United States needs a war, the goal is the resources of Russia. At one time, the United States refused to deploy missile defense in space, the reasons are great vulnerability, high cost, but most importantly, calculations have shown that about 100 warheads will be able to overcome the missile defense system. The United States does not want to pay this price, this damage is unacceptable for them. Now they are trying to solve this problem, especially since we have "reduced" to the point that a new military factor has appeared - "the inadmissibility of losses of a planned strategic nuclear forces grouping." In short, they do everything they need to do, and if they are not adequately countered in this, then it's time to draw conclusions.
  • 222222
    222222 30 October 2013 09: 45
    +1
    Yesterday Henry Kissinger held an annual meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin "" You have many friends in Russia - veterans of our policy, and everyone always listens with great attention to your assessments of the development of the political situation in the world, "Putin stressed
    Before meeting with Vladimir Putin, Henry Kissinger had the opportunity to briefly talk with the head of the presidential administration, Sergei Ivanov. During a conversation in English, Kissinger noted that during the visit he was particularly interested in discussing the relationship of the so-called US-Russia-China triangle.
    1. Tyumen
      Tyumen 30 October 2013 10: 23
      +3
      Let the enemy into your house, and discuss your plans for life with him?
  • Stinger
    Stinger 30 October 2013 09: 46
    +7
    In my opinion there is no need to hysteria. It is necessary to calmly and systematically deploy means of destruction of missile defense elements in Belarus and the Kaliningrad region.
  • ZU-23
    ZU-23 30 October 2013 09: 50
    +4
    Yes, really stop talking with them, maybe it's time to put your missile defense system in Cuba in Venezuela, etc. to help our submarines. So trolls do not complain that we have a lot of money spent on the defense industry)))
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 30 October 2013 10: 18
    +1
    Quote: "It is obvious that no common missile defense system with a potential enemy can be created."
    All unsuccessful attempts to appeal to the conscience of their Western "partners" at the talks on missile defense, they didn’t lead to anything good. The practical implementation of US plans has begun establish missile defense in Europe against Russia. Russia is simply obliged, now it’s realistically to implement measures to counteract EuroPro. Nit is necessary to stop all talking with a potential adversary - NATO. It will not lead to anything good.
  • MilaPhone
    MilaPhone 30 October 2013 10: 20
    +2
    NATO is getting closer to the borders of Russia, so Russia is increasing its missile range more and more.
  • HollyGremlin
    HollyGremlin 30 October 2013 10: 24
    +1
    It is unfortunate that once the bomb ship project did not please, which, if anything, was guaranteed to wash off the floor of America. There is no way to intercept him, here is a guarantee of no attack. And to hunt for missile defense or to overcome it is only a chance for a retaliatory strike.
  • Migari
    Migari 30 October 2013 10: 25
    +3
    Quote: Akim
    I neighing yesterday, I can't. Due to the density of the system and the wrong angle of the photographer, they turned out like sticky dumplings.

    The more they are in this crowd (NATO), the stupid their joint actions, and the Romanians are now in the front row, of those who get the snot immediately, suddenly what.
  • Blondin nikonov
    Blondin nikonov 30 October 2013 10: 28
    +7
    The most interesting thing is that the "world" reacts to the missile defense deployment as if it were self-evident, but how does it come about retaliatory measures (Iskander ...) from the international community in the person of Gay.Y.roppa and P.U. already red foam with bubbles from the mouth climbs ..........
    1. Akim
      Akim 30 October 2013 10: 40
      -1
      Quote: Blondin Nikonov
      The most interesting thing is that the "world" reacts to the deployment of missile defense as a matter of course.

      You must understand that the missile defense system itself is not an attack, but a defense. If you reduce the scale, it’s like the deployment of air defense systems in Georgia. Officially, there can be no complaints about such weapons. Only politically.
      Russia is legal! (I emphasize) puts a fence with a thorn on the Russian-Ukrainian border. But politically, this is not quite the right decision.
      1. Misantrop
        Misantrop 30 October 2013 11: 13
        +3
        Quote: Akim
        the missile defense system itself is not an attack, but a defense.
        Seriously? And does it ANYWHERE depend on the location? "If we reduce the scale" not arbitrarily, but proportionally, it turns out that the American "knight" is trying to pull such a purely protective thing as a knight's breastplate over the head of his tournament opponent. Moreover, not removed from oneself a bib, but one more, additional. And the third one - to hang on the spear, so that he could not even accidentally tear it off the ground. Here's a "dueling code" ... request
        1. Akim
          Akim 30 October 2013 11: 44
          +2
          Quote: Misantrop
          Seriously? And it does NOT depend on the placement?

          Of course, it is clear that this missile defense is not for Iranian missiles, but from Russian ones. There was a good idea. Place similar Russian systems in South America.
          1. Misantrop
            Misantrop 30 October 2013 12: 35
            +2
            Quote: Akim
            Place similar Russian systems in South America.
            And what, missile combat courses from the USA to the Russian Federation through the south pole go? And the active section (in which the effectiveness of these weapons is the highest) is just above South America? belay Did not know... request
            1. Akim
              Akim 30 October 2013 12: 58
              0
              Quote: Misantrop
              And what, missile combat courses from the USA to the Russian Federation through the south pole go?

              Do you know what paths and what objects in the Russian Federation are mapped to the probable targets of American missiles?
              1. Corsair
                Corsair 30 October 2013 13: 40
                +1
                Quote: Akim
                Do you know what paths and what objects in the Russian Federation are mapped to the probable targets of American missiles?

                Certainly, Yusov's strategic ballistic missiles do not know how to "dodge and confuse traces" (they mean CARRIER ROCKETS, not warheads), so it is necessary to intercept them during this flight segment.

                Therefore, there is no difference WHERE warheads are aimed at the territory of Russia ...
                1. Akim
                  Akim 30 October 2013 13: 57
                  0
                  Quote: Corsair
                  Therefore, there is no difference WHERE warheads are aimed at the territory of Russia ...

                  In this case, there are only two players in this field.
              2. Misantrop
                Misantrop 30 October 2013 15: 15
                +1
                Quote: Akim
                Do you know what paths and what objects in the Russian Federation are mapped to the probable targets of American missiles?

                Akim, well, take a look at the globe. Who should the missiles target at launch from the US and through South America? To Tasmania? That's really - the eternal enemy of democracy ... Or the population of emperor penguins urgently needs to be reduced (they don’t fit in with democracy by their name) lol For ALMOST all the other goals on the planet, only Canada could be an adequate location for a Russian missile defense system. Or are there already these installations there that the USA is in such a hurry with an adequate answer? belay
            2. Selevc
              Selevc 30 October 2013 20: 25
              +1
              It seems to me that the most effective measure against the NATO missile defense is the deployment of Iskanders in Cuba to protect Russia, say from Somali pirates - then the Yankees will conquer !!! :)))
              And everything else is only half measures ...
          2. Walker1975
            Walker1975 30 October 2013 14: 28
            +1
            I put you the pros. Of course, missile defense is not from Iran, but I think that it is not ONLY from Russia. Surely the Americans dream of having an ABM umbrella from all countries with nuclear weapons. From China and the Russian Federation in the first place. The more warheads, the denser the umbrella. Nothing personal - only security.
      2. Selevc
        Selevc 30 October 2013 20: 23
        +1
        Quote: Akim
        You must understand that the missile defense system itself is not an attack, but a defense. If you reduce the scale, it’s like the deployment of air defense systems in Georgia. Officially, there can be no complaints about such weapons.

        And why then was there so much noise around the sale of S-300 complexes to Syria and Iran ??? After all, this is also exclusively defensive weapons ...
        1. Akim
          Akim 30 October 2013 22: 32
          0
          Quote: Selevc
          And why then was there so much noise around the sale of S-300 complexes to Syria and Iran ???

          And that Russia did not sell them after that? Any interested party will make noise. Even now in the Turkish tender.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 30 October 2013 10: 33
    +3
    I quote: ... "What to do? Return to national sovereignty in the defense sphere of Russia! This means a complete rejection of chatter about missile defense. It is necessary to develop the national missile defense and aerospace defense systems, as well as the missile defense systems of potential adversaries. Break all unfavorable, unequal agreements on START, stop any negotiations on them. It is necessary to develop a full-fledged nuclear deterrent. To unilaterally withdraw from the treacherous Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles. To restore production of these systems as soon as possible. This is a very important decision. World war is on the threshold. Intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles are needed to ensure Russia's national security.

    In the future, it is necessary to stop consultations and negotiations with our potential enemies on any disarmament issues, this is a deception. To believe in the "peaceful intentions" of the masters of the West, who have washed the planet with the blood of tens of millions of people over the past centuries, is either upward of idiocy or outright betrayal. Moscow should only do what ensures the deepest interests of Russian civilization and its peoples. If you want peace - prepare for war, everything else - from the evil one! "
    Here! The person who wrote the article thinks realistically. Why do these thoughts not occur to our rulers? Why do not they come to mind fat boyars? Yes, because the boyars do not consider themselves citizens of our country! They, like those flies - separately, cutlets (i.e. people and country) - also separately.
    It is high time to break all international treaties that at least to some extent infringe on Russia's interests and undermine its security.
    With regard to upholding my interests, I like the behavior of such a small country as North Korea. Having nothing but rockets and a nuclear arsenal, she is not afraid to threaten and warn even the United States - they say, do not meddle, or else bite! And Russia can not only bite, but also SLIP!
    I fully support the author of the article. Russia should be independent, independent, and should not give up its honor, dignity, for which it must fully take care of its economic and military security. At any cost.
    1. stroporez
      stroporez 30 October 2013 12: 37
      +1
      Quote: pahom54
      refusal of talk about missile defense. It is necessary to develop a national missile defense and aerospace defense, as well as breakthrough systems of missile defense of potential adversaries. Break all unprofitable, unequal agreements on strategic offensive arms, stop any negotiations on them. Full-fledged nuclear deterrence forces need to be developed. Unilaterally withdraw from the treacherous Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles.
      --for this, it’s necessary to have, sorry, stone eggs. And this is definitely not about our leaders ...........
  • Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 30 October 2013 10: 34
    +4
    Poor Romanians ... They do not catch up in the course of who is the first to snatch in the event of a mess ... laughing
    1. MIKHAN
      MIKHAN 30 October 2013 20: 03
      +1
      Romanians hope that as with Hitler they’ll get out like they didn’t make us .. (they’ll eat sour cream and the wool will almost remain ..)))
  • Jogan-xnumx
    Jogan-xnumx 30 October 2013 10: 38
    +4
    In the last two paragraphs, almost everything is said. good It’s high time to correct the legacy of Judas-labeled. In addition, there is Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela. To start. Deploy your missile defense and deterrence forces there. Look for other allies. The motivation for this is as stupidly impudent as that of the P.N.Dosov. The fight against terrorism, the protection of the territory, etc.
    Only at first it is necessary to give good kicks to their supreme leaders. For speed. Yes, to drive all the liberal shit-democrats into the neck. Everything that they grabbed into the treasury, and themselves into the tundra, to lay new railways. routes.
    With all sorts of lisps, peaceful initiatives, gestures of goodwill, nothing good can be achieved. The enemy will remain the enemy, and they have always been enemies. For the simple reason that they always wanted and tried to "devour" us. Unlike us. They calmed down only when they received high quality snot. And then for a while. Until we started to start a record - "guys, let's live together ..." We will live together only when all these hawks are sitting in their chicken coop and shaking together with fear! IMHO. hi
    1. Walker1975
      Walker1975 30 October 2013 14: 30
      0
      An interesting idea about missile defense in South America and Cuba. The only question is: why has it still not been implemented? What is in the way?
      1. V. Salama
        V. Salama 31 October 2013 12: 38
        0
        Quote: Walker1975
        ... What is in the way?
        The same as before, when our RSDs were deployed in Cuba in response to the deployment of Amer's Jupiters in Turkey and Atlases in submarines. With its slanderous squeals, Western propaganda has portrayed us as an empire of evil. Even here you can still find personnel who sincerely believe that the decision to deploy missiles in Cuba was "an act of aggression and dangerous adventurism that brought the world to the brink of nuclear catastrophe." And to this day, many believe that we removed the missiles from Cuba under pressure from the "world community" and the pressure of the United States. In reality, everything was decided by verbal agreements between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Kennedy agreed to remove the missiles from Turkey, but asked Khrushchev not to advertise this, and this was not done immediately, but a little later, as if not in connection with the event. So to give such an excuse to enemy propaganda once again - not only in the West, but also, first of all, our fifth column, and after it our main and inexhaustible resource will be aggravated ...
  • Andrey Peter
    Andrey Peter 30 October 2013 10: 39
    0
    The INF missiles, of course, are necessary, but even more nuclear submarines with Bulava-type missiles are needed, and then no missile defense can help them. Well, and of course I completely agree with the deployment of our missile defense systems closer to their borders.
  • ia-ai00
    ia-ai00 30 October 2013 10: 41
    +4
    I never cease to be amazed at the "friendly" policy of neighboring countries, and the "partner" with a striped flag. And so clank fangs on Russia, "wishing for PEACE" all over the WORLD ...
  • killganoff
    killganoff 30 October 2013 10: 59
    +2
    If you want peace, get ready for war!
  • polkownik1
    polkownik1 30 October 2013 11: 00
    0
    Struggle for the number of anti-missile missiles, their launch ranges, accuracy, etc. - the process is endless and degenerates into an arms race with already known results. I believe that much more attention should be paid to the search and implementation of non-standard (at least for today or tomorrow) solutions. The purpose of such decisions is the maximum possible covert approach of carriers of nuclear charges to the enemy's territory and minimization of the flight time. And maybe not flying ... "Stupid" idea: the charges are already there! They are located in the missile warheads and bombs of the enemy himself! A trifle remains: to figure out how to blow them up in the same place ...
  • major071
    major071 30 October 2013 11: 09
    +4
    The missile defense system, which will become part of the European missile defense system being created by the United States and NATO, started on Monday at a base in Devesela in southern Romania.

    We put a cross on DeCessela. To strike. Romanians dig a hole for themselves.
    1. Androsh
      Androsh 30 October 2013 17: 56
      0
      A lot of crosses must be set for strikes .. take the same Scandinavia in the territory of which there are nuclear missiles to strike at Russia ..
  • Paramon1979
    Paramon1979 30 October 2013 11: 55
    0
    “It is impossible to achieve any positive result in negotiations with the enemy!” Finally, at least someone in the media openly called them the ENEMY! !! STILL our leaders would have drunk this before. And then partners. On one organ, I spit such partners.
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 30 October 2013 12: 49
    +3
    Author, you moron!
    NATO is getting closer to the borders of Russia

    Romania has no border with Russia! It is separated from Russia by Moldova and Ukraine. Russia has a land border with NATO countries in the Baltic states and a maritime border with Turkey, where is that closer?
  • Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 30 October 2013 13: 04
    0
    <<< First, we need to put things in order in the minds, stop the chatter about "cooperation on European missile defense", the creation of a unified anti-missile defense with the EU; the possibility of joint operation of missile defense facilities; "Undirectedness"; "Legal guarantees", etc. It is obvious that no common missile defense system with a potential enemy can be created in principle .... In the future, it is necessary to stop consultations and negotiations with our potential enemies on any disarmament issues, this is a deception. Believing in the "peaceful intentions" of the masters of the West, who have washed the planet with the blood of tens of millions of people over the past centuries, is either upward of idiocy or outright betrayal. >>>
    All this chatter on the topic of missile defense, "non-directionality", "guarantees", persistently developed by home-grown liberals, when everyone has long understood everything, is designed to screw up the brains of the Russian society, allegedly, by the existing opportunity to AGREE with the West, and therefore one should not invest in new defense systems! Immediately, naturally, liberals are reminded of the social programs that suffer from these defense spending. These Pharisees, who suddenly became so concerned about the interests of the people, at the same time, of course, do not remember how they, during the reign of Gorbaty and Apohmeltsin, famously ruined the national economy and took the national property into the pockets of their own and their Western sponsors!
  • Samsebenaum
    Samsebenaum 30 October 2013 14: 05
    +3
    "All such conversations and negotiations only dishonor Russia, speak of its weakness and worthlessness of its leaders. It is impossible to achieve any positive result in negotiations with the enemy!" (cit.)

    I subscribe to every word of the author !!!

    One of the effective measures is the early deployment of the Iskander mobile operational-tactical missile system in the reach of each enemy missile defense system, which is located or planned near our borders.
    It's time to act more aggressively, i.e. work ahead of the curve.
    So let them mount under our sights, realizing that the work is in vain ...
    1. Dazdranagon
      Dazdranagon 30 October 2013 16: 52
      0
      "Iskander" will not reach Devesel even from the Crimea. X-55 threatens them! hi
  • Ihrek
    Ihrek 30 October 2013 16: 37
    +3
    I agree, NATO is the enemy. It was created to destroy the USSR, continues to exist for the destruction of Russia, at least its independence. Since the USSR is not completely destroyed, its core is Russia intact. The main thing is that there should no longer be internal traitors like Gorbachev and EBN.
  • Troy
    Troy 30 October 2013 16: 52
    +3
    You know, I just watched the parade of our guys on a march of Slavs on YouTube, as much as a tear came. That's what I want to say, let them build what they want and where they want, but if it starts, I’ll bite my teeth with teeth, for my family, for the country, for our Orthodox faith. We are Slovenes and we cannot be intimidated or defeated !!!!
    1. Androsh
      Androsh 30 October 2013 18: 43
      -1
      Byzantium was also Orthodox and it was gone .. and the Russian Empire was Orthodox .. it’s the elite and not only the country that changed Orthodoxy and the king .. In the Second World War, we won miraculously .. Our country today sins with mortal sins such as abortion you have to suffer a lot for this ..
  • gorsten79
    gorsten79 30 October 2013 17: 23
    0
    Quote: strannik595
    let them get closer, you won’t have to look far wassat .... in fact, the only thing that can scare NATO is Russia's withdrawal from the treaty banning short- and medium-range missiles, place these missiles at a distance of 5-10 minutes from Romania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and then there will be solid and very legal guarantees ... otherwise they do not understand, no one negotiates with the weak, they are simply devoured, crunching and shouting "WOW"
    1. Troy
      Troy 30 October 2013 18: 10
      0
      Dear, and where to place them, in Kaliningrad? And which ones, Iskander? So they will not get it. But we have boats with missiles, we need to keep such in the Black Sea, then their attempts to build money are wasted.
  • gorsten79
    gorsten79 30 October 2013 17: 26
    0
    At the expense of the agreement on intermediate- and shorter-range missiles, We Iskanders build a few per year. And how many we will be able to build. We will build 20 100 years. But you won’t be scared.
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 30 October 2013 17: 50
      0
      Quote: gorsten79
      At the expense of the agreement on intermediate- and shorter-range missiles, We Iskanders build a few per year. And how many we will be able to build. We will build 20 100 years. But you won’t be scared.

      You know, at a time when the Pioneer RSD group was deployed in the USSR, the Votkinsk plant alone produced 120 (!) Missiles (RSD, ICBMs, etc.) per year. Therefore, if we re-equip the Votkinsk plant itself, organize its effective work, and the work of cooperation, then we can ensure the release of the required number of ICBMs, INF and strategic missile defense systems. And such work is being done. So, not everything is so bad.
  • karal
    karal 30 October 2013 18: 06
    0
    It is necessary to develop a national missile defense and aerospace defense, as well as a system of breakthrough missile defense potential opponents

    This is the arms race, and as a result the Cold War. As soon as statesmen and small-town officials stop stealing the state budget, it will be possible to develop armaments, agriculture, science, technology, etc. .to. China presses from the south-east, and the rest of the United States and NATO.
    1. Androsh
      Androsh 30 October 2013 18: 18
      0
      This power will never stop stealing .. for them the main resources are resources with which they have not small profits, and people are not needed at all, just so that they do not rebel they will throw a bone from the master’s table .. now they just don’t buy a lot of equipment in the army, because they’re afraid that they will be torn from a tidbit of resources ..
  • vitantin
    vitantin 30 October 2013 18: 44
    +3
    Here it is these homosexuals. Where did bankrupts take money from? And it is time for Russia to place something in Venezuela and Cuba, "for protection from Honduras" and not from the United States, honestly.
  • Mechanismoid
    Mechanismoid 30 October 2013 20: 10
    +1
    Well, here's another target on the tactical map formed ... for the first-priority strike in case of "ZAVARUSHKA" ...
  • fat frumos
    fat frumos 30 October 2013 21: 05
    +2
    V. Vysotsky in his ballad "about weapons" perfectly said
    - one has already played with the "panthers", others will finish badly.
  • fat frumos
    fat frumos 30 October 2013 21: 16
    0
    As for me, it is necessary to recruit Ukraine and change its "non-aligned" status to the allied status of Russia. As history has shown, the Ukrainians fought well, tembole does not need to be retrained for technique, since it is not busurmans, plus the Orthodox are not closer in spirit.
    1. Akim
      Akim 30 October 2013 22: 36
      0
      Quote: fat frumos
      As for me, it is necessary to recruit Ukraine and change its "non-aligned" status to the allied status of Russia.

      This status appeared for a reason. Part of the country gravitates toward NATO, most against NATO. The golden mean was found.
      1. fat frumos
        fat frumos 30 October 2013 23: 23
        +1
        The golden mean is the workload of orders of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex, worthy of satisfaction for military personnel (exclusively a contract), and the economy will cling to it and pull up the rest.
        1. Akim
          Akim 30 October 2013 23: 32
          0
          Quote: fat frumos
          and pull up everything else.

          Neither you understand nor ... but in Ukraine. stop Babos here is not the point. At least ideological. And what wing they occupy is right or left, it does not matter.
  • fisherman
    fisherman 30 October 2013 22: 44
    0
    at 41m everyone also talked about the war, but it started unexpectedly ...
  • lucidlook
    lucidlook 31 October 2013 01: 03
    0
    In fact, the shortest distance from Russia to the USA is through the north pole. What does Romania have to do with it? ...
  • nod739
    nod739 31 October 2013 11: 13
    0
    Quote: strannik595
    in fact, the only thing that can scare NATO members is Russia’s withdrawal from the treaty banning short- and medium-range missiles,


    and literally a week or two ago in the news it was that from KapYar they launched poplar (if I’m not mistaken) in Sharyshagan — ala 2000 km — well, it’s not casual
  • Nitarius
    Nitarius 31 October 2013 16: 49
    0
    TIME IT'S TIME TO START AMERICA TO PROTECT AGAINST BETWEEN PEOPLE TERRORISM!
    FELLING IT NEEDS AND AMERICA! DON'T BE ATTENTED THESE!
  • Crrusader40
    Crrusader40 5 November 2013 23: 37
    0
    And why shouldn't they expand to the east, if the state power of "traitors and" allowed it in the 90s. They voluntarily brought out our soldiers and officers, and then left them to live in without any means of subsistence.
    Someone must answer for this.
  • Cormorants
    Cormorants 12 November 2013 09: 14
    0
    It sounds ridiculous, the Romanian-American security partnership wassat
  • Cormorants
    Cormorants 12 November 2013 09: 20
    0
    Guys look at the photo, they have written "down" on their faces, they don't even need to push themselves up)) Death to America!